Mr Rogers tries to re-fight the chops in his petition, but he had a full chance to fight at Appeals in Chicago.

His Eighth Amendment arguments fail, as the precedents show that the chops are fractions of the tax owed, and are not excessive.

“In the instant case, petitioner essentially relies on section 6323(j)(1)(C), which provides that the Secretary may withdraw a NFTL if the Secretary determines that withdrawal will facilitate the collection of the tax liability. In that regard, petitioner argues that ‘[t]he lien precludes petitioner from engaging funding necessary to finance his businesses going forward and earning the money necessary to satisfy the lien, earn a living in his profession, and provide for his retirement and medical care.’ But this argument is not meaningfully different from those rejected by the Court…, nor does the argument acknowledge that withdrawal of the NFTL would compromise the lien priority interests of the United States vis-a-vis petitioner’s other creditors, both present and future. Further, petitioner’s argument ignores the fact that a lien, which is a security device that assures the United States of its priority over other possible creditors, does not deprive a taxpayer of property, unlike a levy.” Order, at p. 21. (Citations omitted).

But this Order and Decision affects only Peoria. As to Chicago Appeals, Mr Rogers can carry out his stated intention that “…he will proceed all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.” Order, at p. 11.

An author, teacher, advocate and trusted advisor, Lew Taishoff is a New York City-based attorney with 51 years of experience in corporate and individual tax and real estate matters. He is an Enrolled Agent, examined and admitted to practice before the Internal Revenue Service, and admitted to practice before the United States ... Continue reading →